Majority Supports Marijuana Legalization

WASHINGTON, D.C. — For marijuana advocates, the last 12 months have been a period of unprecedented success as Washington and Colorado became the first states to legalize recreational use of marijuana. And now for the first time, a clear majority of Americans (58%) say the drug should be legalized. This is in

Public support for legalization more than doubled in the 1970s, growing to 28%. It then plateaued during the 1980s and 1990s before inching steadily higher since 2000, reaching 50% in 2011.

Success at the ballot box in the past year in Colorado and Washington may have increased Americans’ tolerance for marijuana legalization. Support for legalization has jumped 10 percentage points since last November and the legal momentum shows no sign of abating. Last week, California’s second-highest elected official, Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom, said that pot should be legal in the Golden State, and advocates of legalization are poised to introduce a statewide referendum in 2014 to legalize the drug.

(…)

The movement to legalize marijuana mirrors the relatively recent success of the movement to legalize gay marriage, which voters have also approved now in 14 states. Public support for gay marriage, which Americans also overwhelmingly opposed in the past, has increased dramatically, reaching majority support in the last two years.

Another similarity with the same-sex marriage debate is the fact that Republicans are the one partisan group that is dragging its feet:

As are people over the age of 65:

As with same-sex marriage, this appears to be a cultural shift rather than a temporary change in opinion that is likely to reverse itself in the future. Instead, I would expect support for legalization to increase as time goes on and for changes to the law like those we’ve seen in Colorado, Washington, and California to become more and more of the rule rather than the exception. On the whole, that strikes me as a good thing.

About Doug MataconisDoug holds a B.A. in Political Science from Rutgers University and J.D. from George Mason University School of Law. He joined the staff of OTB in May, 2010 and also writes at Below The Beltway.
Follow Doug on Twitter | Facebook

Comments

Will the prison industrial complex or the warrior cops buying tanks with federal drug money keep lobbying hard in Washington against such a thing? My guess is yes. And until the feds leave it alone and the DOJ stops busting people we will just continue the trend.

And remember, kids, stay in school! You can’t expect to sit around all day smoking pot and playing video games and have someone bring you free food, housing, money, and health care. (Note: if you do sit around all day smoking pot and playing video games, we promise you we’ll bring you free food, housing, money, and health care.)

And remember, kids, stay in school! You can’t expect to sit around all day smoking pot and playing video games and have someone bring you free food, housing, money, and health care. (Note: if you do sit around all day smoking pot and playing video games, we promise you we’ll bring you free food, housing, money, and health care.)

So how’s that different than sitting around all day drinking beer and playing video games?

It’s odd that the Republicans, the party that advertises itself as not wanting the government to be involved in people’s lives, that wants the government to be involved in deciding whether people can smoke pot. So much for small government.

@michael reynolds: Considering that Rogen and Hill don’t do anything more creative than acting stoned on camera, they’re hardly the best examples. I haven’t seen Franco in enough things to comment, although I guess you could say that his performance in Spiderman was creative, as I’ve never seen another person do whatever it was that he was doing. Anyway, based on my exposure, the stereotype of the creative stoner doesn’t hold up.

@george: Sure, you’ll find more libertarian-minded conservatives who have no problem with marijuana legalization. But they don’t want to subsidize the lifestyle of the user, so that wasn’t really what I was addressing.

Watch Rogan in the first episode of “Freaks & Geeks” – possibly the most dead on characterization of a teenager I have ever seen an actor do. (and yes, he was playing a stoner)

But then all this guy has done is become very successful in a tough, tough racket, entertained millions of people, and gotten rich in the process. You are right to have contempt for him. No doubt your accomplishments far exceed his.

Also got his start playing a stoner on Freaks & Geeks. Went on to become a highly successful actor, winning a Golden Globe. Got a degree from UCLA while continuing to pursue his acting career. Has also holds an MFA from Columbia, and is a PhD candidate at Yale. Oh, and he teaches at NYU. And produces, and directs. He also finds time to do charity work.

You should probably just avoid talking about anything that involves creative work.

Anyway, based on my exposure, the stereotype of the creative stoner doesn’t hold up.

So weed makes you lazy…..

Is that why we’re arresting people for smoking it?

And here, Pinky, is the ultimate issue. You can giggle at all the pot smoker stereotypes you learned from 30 year old Cheech and Chong movies…….but you still need to come up with a good reason why it should remain illegal.

And slagging on video games? In an age when the video game industry is pumping out hundreds of billions of dollars? If you were wearing a sign, it would say “I just don’t get it.”

Pinky’s whine isn’t about legal weed, really. He’s whining about paying for safety net programs which, in his mind, will be utilized even more heavily because those people will smoke more pot and leech off him. [of course this is foolish, as pot is widely used now, PLUS we are engaged in a doomed "war" trying to stop it, which costs him money]

He’d much prefer to see The Lord (God or the Free Market, whichever) SMITE the undeserving poor. That way, he could more properly bask in the glow of his virtue.

@Rob in CT: Ah, Rob, once again you tell me what I’m really thinking. This time you’re a lot closer. j/k. You’re completely wrong. But keep trying; I’m sure you’ll get it one day. j/k. You probably won’t.

What were you addressing then? My take on it was that you wanted the state to decide what people could or could not put into their bodies. Its quite possible that I misinterpreted what you meant, but if not that, its not apparent to me what point you were making.